Sunday, November 29, 2009

Skin whitening has yet to gain popularity in America, save for the late Michael Jackson and now Sammy Sosa. The former Chicago-slugger, better known for homers and steroids, was pictured a while back in Las Vegas at the Latin America Grammies sporting ‘white face’. Sammy’s move, and full confession, is a good opening to a quick drive-thru on color-ism.

We know that evolutionary skin pigmentation levels, in humans, are a factor of sun intensity, as dictated by latitude. However, within female populations of a given region, relative lightness is also a function of estrogen levels and indicates, to innate male sensitivities, child-bearing potential. It turns out that young females just past puberty are at their lifetime lightest in color, and will become darker with the first, and each successive, child they produce.

So it is not only Euro-ness that some darker people dangerously chase with chemicals and pharmaceuticals, mostly outside of the US in Africa and S. America. It is also youthfulness, as presented by estrogen levels. Of course, I have no idea what crazy Sammy, the dude, is thinking. Somebody needs to tell him that testosterone, the stuff he was illegally taking to slam home runs and get babes, expresses itself in darker skin tones. This is the reason behind the universal womanly swoon of ‘tall, dark, and handsome’. Maybe Sammy is just expressing his youthful feminine side, or (better yet) trying to undo many years of ‘skin-darkening’ steroid abuse. Who knows?

In any event, I put these products, along with colored-eye implants, in that very dangerous, desperate, and MJ-crazy category of I-hate-myself nip/tuck stunts. I am happy that aggressive skin-lightening has never really caught on in the US - despite Beyonce’s’ Revlon commercials.

Sunday, November 22, 2009

I begin by admitting that I lack my usual confidence in what I think I might know objectively about the relationship of body fat to attractiveness. The factors are complex and I have not found clear and convincing data on the role this might play in the mating disparities that black women face. Nevertheless, to ignore this would discount a logic wherein body fat-driven weight differences influence how men and women, especially black men, come to view and respond to each other.

From earlier discussion, I presented that black men are unique in placing their group’s women at the bottom of the attractiveness list of all females, unlike any other ethnicity. Significant empirical evidence of this is found here. Uniqueness in the weight relationship of black women and men stands out. I will offer simply, that the lessening gap between black women’s weight and musculature relative to black men makes black women less dependent, and controllable, and thereby challenging to a fundamental male-female dynamic that has existed for thousands of years.

In every ethnic group, except blacks, the males are larger than the females, during prime mating years, 20-39. The equatorial West African ancestry of black women provided for robust musculature and temperament that had them sharing a greater historical load of the available food gathering and defense demands, over time, while men fulfilled their critical hunter role. If we transport this ancestry to a safe, food-abundant and sedentary lifestyle, you have an environment where black women are simply more able, individually, and willing to get along without black men and their male-centered demands. This does not mean that this is the best for the black family and overall black advancement.

So I guess I am saying weight analysis is one example of the paradox US blacks suffer, as the result of the abrupt movement from Africa to America. Reaction to our environment influences a relationship (similarity in physical status), thereby encouraging a dynamic that tears the fabric of instinctive male-female symbiosis. But is it better to have greater black-male dominance and togetherness, at the cost of black female independence/sovereignty? Without thinking too much I would say no, except when I look at the challenged state of the black community. I am just not sure. My status as a black male begs me to recuse myself from a decision only black women can/should make for and about themselves, although we all bear the result.

Black male-female education attainment disparities are another influence to this paradox challenging US blacks, which I will explore next.

Monday, November 16, 2009

I just saw this ‘ROCumentary’ on black hair, by Comedian/Actor Chris Rock. I expected hard-hitting comedy, but what he served up was more thoughtful, and interesting. Along with his usual wit, Rock exposed a side of black America seldom seen – the side where blacks wrestle with their identity, win a few rounds, but ultimately lose the fight.

The movie serves as empirical evidence to much of what I have presented about hair in the Black Women Series (here). The bottom-line is that black women spend a tremendous amount of money, estimated at $9 Billion/year, trying to make their hair look ‘good’, or not kinky. This effort is in deference to the much-maligned, but still-embraced, Eurasian beauty standard of long, straight hair.

The attachment of black women to their pursuit of good hair is likened, by the women themselves, to a drug addiction. But what is left out, besides burned hair and scalps, poisoned lungs, and disappointment, is the devastating opportunity cost. A large portion of this money could certainly go to truer essentials, like education, fitness, savings, homeownership, debt-avoidance, etc. Instead, the money stuffs the pockets of companies, predominantly white and Asian, only too happy to help blacks look more white/Asian.

Rock also explores the world of hair weaves, including the trafficking of human hair between India and the US. Again, we hear from women so desperate, that they place hair costing thousands on monthly installment plans, while professing that they would go hungry before missing their hair appointment. Rock also exposes the burden, for black men, in dating these self-proclaimed ‘high-maintenance’ women, who expect committed mates to pay for these expensive and temporary hair enhancements.

The most poignant portions of the movie are the segments between Rock and Rev. Al Sharpton, where the chemically-straightened Rev. admonishes black women for placing their vanity ahead of necessities, their own and their children’s. Sharpton’s hypocritical presentation of advice, relative to his James Brown-inspired coif, makes the whole crazy thing believable, and very authentic.

The final cost, again left unsaid in the show, is the physical damage pressing, relaxing, and weaving, does to natural hair and the fitness of black women. This expensive styling results in damaged and shorter hair, pre-mature baldness, less fitness activity, and ultimately less attractiveness. The maintenance of these expensive hairstyle conflicts with jogging, swimming, aerobics, cycling, and any other activity that produces healthful sweating or wet hair. Obesity among black women is epidemic and hairstyle-influenced sedentary levels go to the heart of the issue.

Rock, who deserves credit for wading into these treacherous waters, avoided many of these desperate truths, perhaps for the sake of his own standing with black women, but at what cost?

Thursday, November 12, 2009

The Black Woman series about hair brought me this interesting link to share. The site is about black women and distance running. The post is about the travails of black women with relaxed hair and the conundrum of washing away the sweat, while maintaining clean healthy scalp and hair. The comments evidence how black hair styles influence exercise activity.

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

There are legions of men, and women, who think that a woman’s breast is the focal point of male-female attraction, but this is not the case. Even though breasts have garnered tremendous recent attention, they lag as the best indicators of reproductive fitness. This breast lagging (forgive the pun) is measurable in how men assign attractiveness, relative to breast size. We now know there is more influence in the waists and hips, and (of course) hair, as discussed here.

Research has shown that men are genetically programmed to instantly sight a woman’s waist to hip (WTH) ratio, giving the highest attractiveness rating to a ratio of approximately .7. This means if the waist is 25 inches, the preferred hip is 36, for US men. This rating correlates to estrogen levels and reproductive fitness. But is this preference true for African-male ancestries as well? Indeed it is, but with a twist.

Waist to hip studies measure the circumference. White men favor width from the frontal view, while black men favor width viewed in profile, hence the phrases, ‘flat-butt’ and ‘junk in the trunk’. But in both black and white scenarios, the preferred circumference measurements are close enough to say preference differences are minor across ethnicities, and are explainable.

In the male hunting-female gathering evolution of humans there is less gathering in locales further from the equator, like Europe and Scandinavia. This has caused the gatherers (women) to lessen their butts, while still maintaining the desirable WTH ratio. The women who remained closer to the equator kept the gluteus maximus muscles needed for the best gathering. (here)

The rub comes in when plentiful food and sedentary life styles cause obesity to explode, as in America. US men, like their world-wide counterparts, maintain their appetite for casual sex, but show a decline in willingness to sign on to long-term contracts to mates and offspring. This attraction and willingness, or not, to commit is baked into our brains. It is true that social conditioning can offset what our genes tell us to do, but only to a lesser degree.

The behavior of men is additionally influenced by the availability of casual sex, in the wake of declining estrogen-signaling attractiveness. The lowering of the WTH ratio in black women is further aided by the sedentary behavior resulting from costly hairstyles that ward off daily exercise routines. To be fair, men, black and white, also suffer bulging waistlines from obesity, however, testosterone-signaling attraction and behaviors of women toward men is a better subject for another post.

Wednesday, November 04, 2009

On the heels of the much publicized Richmond High School (CA) gang rape of a 15 year old, I found this article on gang rape psychology. It helped me to begin to understand such heinous behavior. Article link here.

Tuesday, November 03, 2009

From the day the first alchemist, with a brunette wife, saw a blond or redhead, hair color has been a sexual attractor, and something to put on and take off. This post is not only about hair color, but skin tone as well, as one can’t really talk about one without the other, especially if the subject is attraction.

With this discussion comes ‘negative sexual selection’, which describes intent away from long-term partnering, and toward casual sex, a grave issue in the black community. Men will pursue sex indiscriminately (including fathering children); while simultaneously remaining selective about the partner to whom they commit themselves. Managing these opposing interests will always be part of the female role, whether we think this is enlightened or not. Moderate hair coloring, within a strategy of looking attractive, is part of this critical family development practice, as well as a good chunk of the $9 billion/year (US) black hair-care industry.

The key to understanding attraction of hair color and skin tone is that humans have an innate sense of what is natural and healthy, as an indication of longevity and reproductive capacity. Any deviation from what looks natural challenges our senses, resulting in negative sexual selection. Also, coloring the hair is a tactic of short-term gain, due to the backend ‘cost’ of unattractiveness, once the natural color returns. For the record, coloring also damages the hair, leads to shortening of average length, and thinning, again enhancing unattractiveness.

Just as women who straighten or curl their hair mimic those women who have naturally straight or curly hair, so too should women behave when they choose to color. Because the genes that govern hair color also exert influence over skin tone (here), the relationship is critical. This is how nature aligns the two into the most attractive combinations. Violate nature’s rules for what goes with what, and viola, you get unattractive. A competent hair stylist is one who knows which hair colors will complement the client.

Enhancing natural color is the most logical coloring behavior, to stand out. Hiding gray, within natural colors, enhances youthfulness and attractiveness. Picking colors that look good on magazine models or Hollywood celebrities is a bad idea, as these rarely transfer as hoped.

As black women's hair comes naturally in brown and black, these are the colors women should stick to with their enhancements, understanding the long-term costs. Blonde and red enhancement should be limited to those women who have fair-hair/skin in their ancestry, so as not to set up a battle with skin tone.

For black females, when a man tells them that their hair looks good, they might consider if his motivation is simply to have sex and move on, or if he is saying that he thinks the woman is a good prospect to consider committing his long-term resources. The fate of large swaths of black humanity rest significantly on the black female response to the male approach. Too often this exchange, around hair and looks, is the seemingly harmless foreplay preceding fatherless children, single motherhood, and underclass struggle.

Privacy Policy

Privacy Policy for actingwhite.com

The privacy of our visitors to actingwhite.com (acting black) is important to us.

At actingwhite.com, we recognize that privacy of your personal information is important. Here is information on what types of personal information we receive and collect when you use and visit actingwhite.com, and how we safeguard your information. We never sell your personal information to third parties.

Log FilesAs with most other websites, we collect and use the data contained in log files. The information in the log files include your IP (internet protocol) address, your ISP (internet service provider, such as AOL or Shaw Cable), the browser you used to visit our site (such as Internet Explorer or Firefox), the time you visited our site and which pages you visited throughout our site.

Cookies and Web BeaconsWe do use cookies to store information, such as your personal preferences when you visit our site. This could include only showing you a popup once in your visit, or the ability to login to some of our features, such as forums.

We also use third party advertisements on actingwhite.com to support our site. Some of these advertisers may use technology such as cookies and web beacons when they advertise on our site, which will also send these advertisers (such as Google through the Google AdSense program) information including your IP address, your ISP , the browser you used to visit our site, and in some cases, whether you have Flash installed. This is generally used for geotargeting purposes (showing New York real estate ads to someone in New York, for example) or showing certain ads based on specific sites visited (such as showing cooking ads to someone who frequents cooking sites).

You can chose to disable or selectively turn off our cookies or third-party cookies in your browser settings, or by managing preferences in programs such as Norton Internet Security. However, this can affect how you are able to interact with our site as well as other websites. This could include the inability to login to services or programs, such as logging into forums or accounts.